Offences involving dog biting 371/2022
FOI Reference: 371/2022
Request:
1. Whether your police force records attacks as a separate offence
2. The number of dog attacks recorded by your police force in each of the years from 2017 to 2021.
3. The number of arrests made in relation to dog attacks by your force in each of the years from 2017 to 2021.
4. How many dangerous dogs were seized by your force in each of the years from 2017 to 2021.
5. How many dogs were destroyed in your force area each of the years from 2017 to 2021.
Clarification:
By dog attacks, I am referring to both dog-on-dog attacks, and dogs attacking humans.
Further Clarification:
Question one would be dog-on-dog attacks, rather than other animals.
Response:
Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.
Where exemptions are relied upon Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Dyfed-Powys Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:
(a) states that fact,
(b) specifies the exemption in question and
(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information you have requested. However, we are withholding the whole of the requested information since we consider that the Section 12(1) exemption the Cost of Compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit applies to it.
Section 12 (1) – The cost of compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit
Section 12(1) states: “…Section 1 (1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit.”
The cost of providing you with the information requested in respect of your request is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of locating and retrieving the information exceeds the “appropriate level” as stated in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004. It is estimated that it would exceed 18 hours (i.e. minimum 197 hours) to comply with this part of your request. The regulations can be located @
www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2004/20043244.htm
The Freedom of Information Department has been advised that the information in relation to question 3 of the request is not held in an easily retrievable format. This is due to the fact, in order to ascertain whether an arrest was made, each record would have to be examined as suspects can be arrested and de-arrested without the necessity to book through custody.
It has been established that there are a total of 1,184 records that would require individual interrogation and it has been estimated that it would take a minimum of 10 minutes to research each individual record. The relevant time estimate is detailed below:
2017: 231 crimes x 10 minutes per crime record = 38.5 hrs
2018: 224 crimes x 10 minutes per crime record = 37.33 hrs
2019: 905 crimes x 10 minutes per crime record = 35.66 hrs
2020: 237 crimes x 10 minutes per crime record = 39.5 hrs
2021: 278 crimes x 10 minutes per crime record = 46.33 hrs
Total time estimate to complete whole request = 197 hours
In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for the WHOLE of this request under Section 17(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is relying on a claim that section 12 or section 14 applies must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that fact.
You may wish to refine and resubmit your request so that it reduces the time shown above to fall within the 18 hours.
Should you require any further advice in relation to this matter please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Please also be advised that should the request be refined, it does not remove the Force’s right to cite exemptions if relevant.
Although excess cost removed the force’s obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, as a gesture of goodwill, I have supplied information, relative to your request, retrieved or available before it was realised that the fees limit would be exceeded. I trust this is helpful, but it does not affect our legal right to rely on the fees regulations for the remainder of your request.
Response 1:
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below.
We do not record dog-on-dog attacks; however, we do record dog-on-human attacks.
Response 2:
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below.
|
Year |
Arrests Made in Relation to Dog Attacks (on Humans) |
|
2017 |
231 |
|
2018 |
224 |
|
2019 |
214 |
|
2020 |
237 |
|
2021 |
278 |
Please note: Dog on Dog attacks are not recorded.
Response 4:
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below.
|
Year |
Dangerous Dogs Seized |
|
2017 |
6 |
|
2018 |
10 |
|
2019 |
2 |
|
2020 |
4 |
|
2021 |
6 |
Response 5:
I can confirm that Dyfed-Powys Police does hold the information requested, as outlined below.
|
Year |
Dangerous Dogs Destroyed |
|
2017 |
0 |
|
2018 |
6 |
|
2019 |
3 |
|
2020 |
1 |
|
2021 |
0 |
It should be noted that as a result of the systems adopted by Dyfed-Powys Police in relation to the recording of such information that the information released may or may not be accurate.
Furthermore, it should also be noted that Police forces in the United Kingdom are routinely required to provide crime statistics to government bodies and the recording criteria is set nationally. However, the systems used for recording these figures are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the crime data. It should be noted that for these reasons this force's response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other response you may receive.
(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 09/06/2022)